Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Westbrook v. United States, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Larnette Westbrook, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Westbrook's motion for general relief and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Westbrook v. United States, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Larnette Westbrook, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Westbrook's motion for general relief and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-12-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7399

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Larnette Westbrook, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Westbrook's motion for general relief and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Westbrook v. United States, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Larnette Westbrook, a federal prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding no reversible error. The Fourth Circuit also denied Westbrook's motion for general relief and dispensed with oral argument, determining the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the court materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-7399

    LARNETTE M. WESTBROOK,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg.
    Irene M. Keeley,
    District Judge. (1:09-cv-00047-IMK-JSK)

    Submitted:

    December 17, 2009

    Decided:

    December 29, 2009

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Larnette M. Westbrook, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Larnette M. Westbrook, a federal prisoner, appeals the
    district
    magistrate
    (2006)

    courts
    judge

    petition.

    reversible error.

    order
    and
    We

    accepting

    denying
    have

    the

    relief

    recommendation

    on

    reviewed

    his

    the

    28 U.S.C.

    record

    and

    of

    the

    2241

    find

    no

    Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

    by the district court.

    Westbrook v. United States, No. 1:09-cv-

    00047-IMK-JSK

    Va.

    (N.D.W.

    June

    18,

    Westbrooks motion for general relief.

    2009).

    We

    also

    deny

    We dispense with oral

    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately


    presented in the materials before the court and argument would
    not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like